Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

PEOPLE PROFITED, some unduly, from the Civil War as from all wars and other times of rapid expenditure of government funds. A common perception is that the corruption and taking of excess profits (profiteering) came about in part because the secretary of war, Simon Cameron, was a conniver and a hack whose sloppy practices allowed profiteers to foist on the government defective weapons, uniforms, and other equipment in violation of President Abraham Lincoln's order that all contracts be sent out for competitive bids.

Actually, it was somewhat more nuanced than that. There is little evidence about procurement and profiteering in the South, but profiteering presumably occurred there as it did in the North, especially during the war's early stages. The initial phase of war is chaotic, and until the system becomes ordered there will be those who take advantage. The system was designed for a much smaller force, a more leisurely pace, a shorter war. The initial procurement effort was haphazard, disrupting the civilian economy in the haste to field armies.

The federal expectation of the war need was 250,000 Union troops for maybe 90 days. The army reached 1.7 million before the war ended four years later. The new kind of war started while experts still debated whether to continue privateering and the sharing of prizes taken at sea. Profiteering occurred in every way anyone could imagine to make money off new technology: steamships, railroads, machine tools, and more complex weapons. Patent royalties, high salaries for executives, stock speculation and manipulation—these were new avenues as well. Shoddy millionaires arose, but before profiteering became outrageous, the procurement service federalized, organized, and streamlined.

Shoddy Uniforms

Initially, the states bought uniforms. New York contracted with Brooks Brothers in April 1861 for 12,000 uniforms. The company produced 5,000 uniforms in a week and the rest shortly thereafter. The contract was improperly let, with only 24 hours' bid notice, with insider information and a gift to the wife of the state treasurer, who signed the contract. The price was $20.00 per garment, but later military uniforms would be contracted at $18.00.

The clothier used lighter weight and, in some cases, rotting cloth. These shoddy uniforms had the look of better quality army-specified wool. Poorly cut and ill-fitting garments sometimes lacked buttons or buttonholes. Brooks Brothers claimed that the damaged goods were only 500 of 36,000 uniforms it made. New York State said it was a majority. Brooks Brothers replaced 2,350 uniforms, a value of $45,000. The episode was embarrassing to the state and the clothier because it happened in the middle of the media capital, New York City. It gave a new label to the shoddy aristocracy, the “shoddyocracy,” whose homes had shoddy pianos “all case and no music,” shoddy carpets “brilliant colors and little wool,” and so on. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, had a similar scandal full of cronyism, fraud, and inferior product.

Railroad Profiteering

The first controversy came in getting troops to protect the capital. Secretary of War Cameron's family owned the Northern Central, one of only two connections from the north. Cameron had the duty of deciding how many troops traveled on his family's line and at what price. There was an unavoidable conflict of interest. In the western states, the railroads had colluded three years prior to the war; troops would ride at first class rates only, and they would have only 80 pounds of baggage each.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading